Microsoft legal unfazed by Ubuntu Windows XP GUI clone

Microsoft legal has decided to react passively to the news of Ylmf OS, a Linux …

When word came over the holidays that a Chinese group had created an Ubuntu distribution named Ylmf OS that clones the look and feel of Windows XP, we contacted Microsoft to see what they thought about this very odd way of pirating the company's most popular operating system. While some speculated that Redmond would take action to stamp out Ylmf OS rather quickly, not in the name of pirating the operating system's code but in the name of protecting its GUI, the official response we received back is nothing of the sort.

"We have not really evaluated the code here, but assuming that this is a Linux implementation, we agree that the existing laws against software piracy are unlikely to apply here," a Microsoft spokesperson told Ars. "So we'd have to look to the protection offered under intellectual property law generally in the relevant jurisdictions. But it would be difficult to talk about the legal options in a general sense as each instance is unique, depending not only on the local IP laws in play (in this case in China) but also the technical implementation itself. We'd need to drill down into the specifics to understand better what Microsoft IP rights may be at stake here."

We prodded the company further to see whether it would be making an effort to "evaluate the code" and "drill down into the specifics" or if it would largely ignore the release since this was Linux and not stolen code. "While we can't comment on the future, we have no current litigation efforts in place about this," the Microsoft spokesperson confirmed to Ars. The almost pixel-perfect copycat is here to stay, at least for now. That stance might change if the release gains any traction. We doubt it will.

55 Reader Comments

There's several somewhat annoying differences between XP and the UI in the screenshot (which'd likely just annoy me, as it'd make it just feel *wrong*). I also somewhat doubt that the UI clone extends too far beyond what you see in the screenshot (has the Control Center been remodeled? is the file manager an explorer lookalike? are the settings dialogs similar? etc).

People have made clones like this before. Each time they do it does actually get a bit better and in-depth.

I remember that a few had a control panel that passably looked like XP's from a cursory glance.

Most of the time these things are just for a joke or to run Linux in situations were users might piss and moan if they are given something different. It'll never go anywhere except maybe to provide a new Gnome theme.

Most users would not be able to point out to you any UI differences between Windows 2000 and Windows 7 unless you put screenshots side by side and even then they would probably only be able to figure out the most obvious differences.

Usually the Ars comment section has a higher standard than it does this time. Please, guys, watch the insults and name-calling.

If Microsoft concludes internally that it doesn't have a case, it could still be to its advantage, if a clone competitor looks like it's good enough that people might actually use it, to raise FUD. They can issue statements like "of course we will protect our intellectual property" or "relying on that could be mighty risky" even if they have no intent of ever going to court.

Originally posted by sprockkets:Hey Microsoft, remember that "look and feel" lawsuit from a fruity company? How's it feel now?

If the article gave any indication that MS cared about this, your comment might have merit.

As they don't, it just makes you look like a douche. Congratulations.

Perhaps you can also reread the article and then fuck off.

No, he is correct. Fruits always find something to whine about even if it has nothing at all to do with the original fruity lawsuit. Plus, the fruits where not exactly new fruits either, but rather fruits xeroxed from another company.

Originally posted by sprockkets:Hey Microsoft, remember that "look and feel" lawsuit from a fruity company? How's it feel now?

If the article gave any indication that MS cared about this, your comment might have merit.

As they don't, it just makes you look like a douche. Congratulations.

That response was indeed rather lethargic from Microsoft. They likely don't give a rats ass about this (especially since it's by a no-name distro in China), and only care in case it could threaten their IP (i.e. like how with trademarks they could risk losing them).

It mostly just looks like KDE 4 (the file manager looks similar to Dolphin) with a luna theme, and XP style widgets... Not really that original or unique as far as clones go.

Originally posted by Joe Buck:Usually the Ars comment section has a higher standard than it does this time. Please, guys, watch the insults and name-calling.

If Microsoft concludes internally that it doesn't have a case, it could still be to its advantage, if a clone competitor looks like it's good enough that people might actually use it, to raise FUD. They can issue statements like "of course we will protect our intellectual property" or "relying on that could be mighty risky" even if they have no intent of ever going to court.

Ylmf will never go anywhere. There have been dozens and dozens of XP look alike Linux systems for years.

They all fall into the same trap:

Nobody cares. The developers will play around with it just long enough until they get bored then it'll fade off into history.

If it DID actually go anywhere then it'll fall into the second trap that nobody has reached yet.. and that is if you make it look like XP then people will expect it to act like XP. Users will get upset the first time they try to install their favorite applications to it and none of them work.

Originally posted by allinthefamily:I think the bigger question is; what's the point?

One main strength of any linux distro is that it is not Windows. For me, copying the XP GUI at least partially negates any reason a distro might have to exist in the first place.

But, somebody is using this, so I guess I could be wrong.

Who doesn't want an OS that looks nine years old and doesn't run any applications you'd expect? If they recreated some stuff like the control panel and network management, it might make a great netbook OS, familiar yet free. But I doubt that'll happen

I'm not surprised. Having tried three Ubuntu distros over the last few years, I concluded that Linux is trying its hardest to do everything Windows does, but it is needlessly complicated in comparison.

Huh? All they're saying is that no code has been stolen - ergo, the case would fall to intellectual property. They could claim the icons are theirs (they are), but they'd have to look into the specifics of regional protection.

It doesn't say they don't care, just that it isn't as obvious as code piracy case with regards to dealing with infringement.

Originally posted by sprockkets:Hey Microsoft, remember that "look and feel" lawsuit from a fruity company? How's it feel now?

If the article gave any indication that MS cared about this, your comment might have merit.

As they don't, it just makes you look like a douche. Congratulations.

Actually he has a pretty good point. Microsoft to this day still rips of the Mac GUI - no fucking way can they go after this, regardless of anything else - they would just force a precedent against themselves.

Originally posted by drag:Most users would not be able to point out to you any UI differences between Windows 2000 and Windows 7 unless you put screenshots side by side and even then they would probably only be able to figure out the most obvious differences.

ARe these imaginary users you mention blind or braindead?

You would have to be blind not to be able to see the UI differences between 7 and 2000.

Originally posted by sprockkets:Hey Microsoft, remember that "look and feel" lawsuit from a fruity company? How's it feel now?

If the article gave any indication that MS cared about this, your comment might have merit.

As they don't, it just makes you look like a douche. Congratulations.

Actually he has a pretty good point. Microsoft to this day still rips of the Mac GUI - no fucking way can they go after this, regardless of anything else - they would just force a precedent against themselves.

Whoa there Stevie...

Yes, Vista and Win7 are very Mac-centric in their look and feel.

Some of what's contained in this Linux look alike isn't just "look and feel", rather it's the actual icons that Microsoft (shockingly enough) owns the property rights to.

Originally posted by sprockkets:Hey Microsoft, remember that "look and feel" lawsuit from a fruity company? How's it feel now?

If the article gave any indication that MS cared about this, your comment might have merit.

As they don't, it just makes you look like a douche. Congratulations.

Actually he has a pretty good point. Microsoft to this day still rips of the Mac GUI - no fucking way can they go after this, regardless of anything else - they would just force a precedent against themselves.

Clearly a fruit found another.

Your right, only Apple creates new UI ideas and MS only get thier ideas from apple.

All thing start with apple and end with MS.

Oh wait, what about all those other companines? Im sorry, but if yoy look at winodws 7 and see a lot of mac-rippoff, your a biased fruity.

EDIT - its also one thing to be inspirsed by and one thing to copy. I guess the fruities cant see the difference there either.

Originally posted by sprockkets:Hey Microsoft, remember that "look and feel" lawsuit from a fruity company? How's it feel now?

If the article gave any indication that MS cared about this, your comment might have merit.

As they don't, it just makes you look like a douche. Congratulations.

Additionally, even if they did care, the Mac OS look and feel lawsuit was about UI elements Apple felt they owned - that is, it was more about the feel than the look. (Part of the lawsuit was about overlapping windows.)

This is a blatant ripoff of Windows XP. As opposed to the Apple case, where even a cursory glance could tell the two (Windows 3.0 and System 6, for example) apart.

A footnote: Xerox tried to sue Apple for the same thing, in response to Apple's suits against Microsoft and Digital Research (makers of GEM). The only reason it failed was because the statute of limitations had expired.

Might be pretty funny if they came out with a statement along the lines of:

"We're rather surprized anyone cares enough about the look and feel of an 8 year old OS that they'd want to copy it with such slavish attention to detail. As for our legal options, well, as long as they don't steal our trademarks, or try to pass themselves off as being officially associated with us, we can't see the problem."

"We're done with the XP look, it's like an old worn out shoe now. It was a good shoe, but we've moved on to bigger and better things."

"After all, we're not nearly as lawsuit happy about our look and feel as other companies have been in the past..."

I'm not surprised. Having tried three Ubuntu distros over the last few years, I concluded that Linux is trying its hardest to do everything Windows does, but it is needlessly complicated in comparison

I want to keep that quote around for a while, just in case I need a good chuckle!

lol . . you do that. But take a minute and read through all of the Ubuntu forums and tell me they aren't riddled with folks trying to make their Linux do something that Windows does. :-) Don't get me wrong, I completely understand the advantages of Linux. But as a desktop solution for the average user, it has a long way to go.

I'm not surprised. Having tried three Ubuntu distros over the last few years, I concluded that Linux is trying its hardest to do everything Windows does, but it is needlessly complicated in comparison

I want to keep that quote around for a while, just in case I need a good chuckle!

Yes. It's funny how deluded Windows users are.

quote:

Originally posted by 3power:

quote:

Originally posted by Devin:

quote:

I'm not surprised. Having tried three Ubuntu distros over the last few years, I concluded that Linux is trying its hardest to do everything Windows does, but it is needlessly complicated in comparison

I want to keep that quote around for a while, just in case I need a good chuckle!

lol . . you do that. But take a minute and read through all of the Ubuntu forums and tell me they aren't riddled with folks trying to make their Linux do something that Windows does. :-) Don't get me wrong, I completely understand the advantages of Linux. But as a desktop solution for the average user, it has a long way to go.

I user that's a refugee wanting to do something they did on their XP systems. Imagine that. You could apply the same nonsense to MacOS and it would be equally true.